Sunday 25 April 2010

The Refs In England Destroy Our Players


(Article submitted by Sav)

Why is it that referees in England, week in and week out, make so many wrong game-defining decisions? Why isn’t anyone doing or even saying something about it? Why is it so hard to even contemplate change in some sacred areas in English football? It seems it is against the English culture to criticize authority. “Don’t criticize the referee; if you do, you will kill the game”. But I say, you should not worry about killing the game because the referees in England are doing a good job of this on their own. Something needs to be done and sooner rather than later. What is even worse it affects the way football is played in England and as a result stifles the development of talent in English football.

What needs to go out of the window is the religious belief that football is a physical game. No it is not! Rugby is a physical game; football is a skilful team game. Referees should not allow disguised rugby players on a football pitch to spoil it. When a skilful attacker is dribbling through a number of players, balancing himself finely while running at 30 miles an hour, it doesn’t take too much of a push to put him off balance and surrender the advantage to the defender. A little shoulder-to-shoulder or a slight body check is enough to render, in an instant, all the skills possessed by the attacking player useless on an English football pitch. The defender is, almost always, given the benefit of the doubt by the referees in England.

Teams and coaches who need to be successful in these playing conditions in England can ignore the fact that referees favour defensive play at their own peril. It doesn’t pay dividends to play attractive attacking football in England. Look at the switch of fortunes for Allardyce’s Bolton when he finally realised that this is how he can get results in the Premiership. Alex Ferguson made this rule the foundation of his success; his defenders push the tolerance of the referees to the limits. It pays dividends because the benefits are far greater than the occasional costs. Building a team that plays skilful and elegant football just doesn’t cut it in England I am afraid.

Sav

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

If you don't like contact sports don't watch football then

Hammersfan said...

LOL, I agree mate. Bonds was one of our greatest players; he would have hated the way players are ptotected in the modern game.

Anonymous said...

I love spector is is so brave and skillfull

Hammersfan said...

Ronaldo, Giggs, Berbatov, Rooney, Tevez, Valencia, Cantona, Nani...I could go on. Ferguson doesn't win trophies because of skilful players. Cobblers Sav mate, cobblers.

Deane said...

but all successful managers dating back to Shankley have been openly critical of referees and their players have shown the same disdain part of the success of big? clubs is their ability to manipulate referees
As an example Cole should have had a penalty yesterday he was clearly fouled but although off balance tried to continue rather than go down His reward? tame shot cleared Now you breathe on some players and they fly through the air (Gerrard anyone?) free kick everytime Refs have to accept the blame for that
The last time we had anybody with a great talent for sailing through the air he played in the same team as Bonds and the tackle that ended Devonshire's career went virtually unpunished You want that era back then bring back standing (actually I like that idea) bannanas on the pitch british bulldog for sale at the ground etc etc you yourself say the game has moved on well it's time skill was rewarded and the cloggers punished The likes of Allardyce driven from the game and people like Martinez thrived

Hammersfan said...

As with most things Deane, it's a case of balance and moderation. You want the Brookings, but you also want Billy Bonds. Tackling is a skill and we should not lose that skill from football. As I said in an earlier reply, two of the biggest cheers yesterday were for thunderous tackles by Noble and Parker. Football is a game of passion, a game of commitment, a game of physical challenges.

With regard to the "penalty" yesterday, Kirkland was incredibly brave and was a mess afterwards. I think tripping a big lump like Cole with your FACE would be a very harsh excuse for a penalty. I thought Wiley got that spot on personally.

Sav said...

I totally agree with Deane's assessment and thank God there are still people who can see what is really going on with the referees in the Premier League and how the powerful big clubs take full advantage of that. And I totally think that if it was Rooney being fouled yesterday instead of Cole (despite the accident on the goalkeeper) Mr. Wiley that you so praise would have given a penalty and a red card to the keeper. By the way, there were two penalties awarded at Old Trafford only yesterday. Although the first one was clearly a penalty, the second it was only slight push from the defender (a lot less innocent than the trip over of Cole or the blatant pushing on Ilan. You know, people need to wake up to what is happenning in England with the referees. The big clubs and the referees take advantage of the widespread embedded belief that football should be a physical game to manipulate results to their advantage. West Ham more often than not suffers from this paranoia.

Sav said...

And speaking of Devonshire, thank you Deane for reminding me what has ended his career - the physical English football!

Hammersfan said...

Bloody hell, now it is the Deane and Sav love in, LOL. Allegiances formed and broken!

Both were very clear penalties at Old Trafford Sav. Ilan was not blatantly pushed! These guys don't help themselves with their play acting of course. I watched Ilan after he was "poleaxed" by one challenge. He rolled around in "agony", realised nobody was taking any notice and the ball was back in his area of the piitch and he stood up and started sprinting! Bloody absurd and CHEATING!

hammalot said...

Its the same in all countries mate, England just appears worse because of the quick nature of play.

I could go into a big discussion here but Ill keep it simple. The game has evolved past its ancient officiating standards and FIFA (like all decrepit centralized institutions ie. Catholic Church) are too 'prideful' or lazy to do the hard work, trial and error, deep match analysis etc. to adjust the game for the betterment of both players and spectators. You think players like the random nature of what qualifies as yellow cards or some cheater getting a dubious penalty, undermining all their hard work. I dont even think the referees like all the responsibility and vitriol the fans and press give them.

FIFA are making money hand over fist at the moment and dont recognize the impetus (altho why they wouldnt want more of the US$, Chinese RMB or Indian Rupee is beyond me). Other sports have made adjustments and have grown remarkably. Do you think the NBA would have half as many superstars if there wasnt a 3pt line or reach in fouls were never implemented?

Summary: FIFA to blame for keeping their rules laughingly vague. Everyone is a loser.

I predict there will plenty of bogus penalties and diving at the WC. Hopefully its bad enough for something to happen.

Hotshot C said...

Portsmouth relegated!
Burnley Relegated!
Hull Relegated! (unless they can score 23 goals in the next two games)...

Let's celebrate, hopefully it's onwards and upwards from here! Next some new buys in the transfer market, then the new stadium - happy days!!!

Stani Army said...

Guys,
I think we have to be careful criticising officials as things start to spiral. They start getting death threats from knob-heads etc. We cant risk that kind of thing. By no means should lack of open criticism be used as an excuse to not improve officiating though. The referees' chiefs need to do their jobs to maintain the integrity of the game. Without the good enforcement of rules, the game will lack integrity.

I agree there is a lack of understanding or appreciation from officials (maybe because many haven't played the game) of the relatively small contact it takes to send a player who is travelling at speed, toppling over.

Still, I think we can say that we have the best refs in the world. Some of the decisions I see on the European stage are frustratingly poor. Those refs are made to look like mugs and they are none the wiser.

As for the penalty decision yesterday, I think credit should go to Cole for trying to carry on (although he should have scored), and credit to Kirkland for being brave. I don't think Kirkland did enough wrong for it to be a penalty. Maybe Cole could have done more to 'win' the penalty but whether that would have been right or wrong is another debate.

Whilst we're on that Cole miss...why are our English strikers so lacking in composure?! When a chance presents itself, they just get tunnel vision and end up just blasting the ball or making completely the wrong choice. Had that been a half decent Italian, Spanish, Brazilian or Argentinian striker rounding Kirkland yesterday, he would have taken at least another touch and looked up to see the defender on the line before lifting it into the goal. Cole was just looking down. When he missed that I thought we had had it.

Hammersfan said...

Rooney, Defoe and bent don't lack composure Stani mate. I think Bent must support West Ham by the way. He missed a stack of chances against us at the Stadium of Light, fell arse over tit when clean through at Upton Park and then scored the winner, brilliantly, against Hull. Better player than Cole? Discuss.

Hotshot C said...

Bent's record speaks for itself! It's always been high - and a lot higher than Cole!

Hotshot C said...

Fanno.
I realise that you're a little on the cynical side, but you really need to add a post about the fact we're not playing fizzy pop next year, and also a post mortom of what went wrong...

Here's a starting point if you want to post this (and maybe add to it)?

After getting drunk with celebration....



There's going to have to be a post mortom on this sorry situation we found ourselves in 'worse than waking up in bed with a trannie asking you to marry her/ him'...

OK so the club got caught up in the financial meltdown, but DUXBURRY has a lot to answer for!!
This is his record:

- Tries to pull the wool over the eyes of the premier league and buys 2 Argentinians on a dodgy deal - cost to the club : £35 million in compensation.

- Then tries to pull the wool over our eyes and comes up with 'the project', where he is to install the best upcoming manager and well known coach in Europe, along with the best scouts and English and foreign talent - cost: Didn't quite work according to plan, and almost got the club relegated..

- He then borrows on a few years TV and sponsorship money and sells our best defenders and striker (Collins and Bellend), in order to buy and loan 'world class players' (Jiminez and Diamante) - cost: Almost got us relegated and made the club an emmbarressment, while other clubs like Wigan, Sunderland and even Hull were buying/ loaning decent players (Zaki, Bent - yes remember him? Geovanni etc)..

If any one can add to this list please do so!

Stani Army said...

Disagree HF. Rooney is the only one. Defoe does lack composure though not as much as other Eng strikers (or players even). I think that is the one thing stopping him from being world-class. And Bent's chance conversion ratio proves he does also lack composure.

As for the Cole/Bent argument....I know Shearer discussed it on Match of the Day but he used one game, and selective clips from it, to completely dismiss Cole who is still carrying niggles. Shearer went for that Bent guy but that would not be my choice....and putting it like that, I think I have left you no choice but to agree with me HF :)

In all honesty, I wouldn't take Heskey which will allow me to take Cole and Bent in the 5 strikers. Rooney, Defoe, Crouch, Cole, Bent.....all-round, this is a better mix of strikers than if we had either Heskey in there for Cole or Heskey in there for Bent.

Hotshot,
His record is very good but I don't think he'll manage anything near that on the international stage. Also, if we go on records alone, then we are in fact saying that Bent (24 Goals), is as good as Rooney (26), Drogba (25) and Tevez (22). Now we all know that Bent doesn't fit in the same class as those guys. Like I said though, I would take him because he deserves it at the end of the day.

Hotshot C said...

Stani.

You say that "Bent (24 Goals), is as good as Rooney (26), Drogba (25) and Tevez (22). Now we all know that Bent doesn't fit in the same class as those guys."

A striker's job is to score goals - and he does that - simple...
If you want to talk about flair look at midfielders..

Stani Army said...

Hotshot,
I agree he has the league stats mate but I do not believe a striker's sole purpose is to score goals. In a winning team, a striker who does not score many is worth retaining because his effectiveness at the end of the day is measured by what the team does. It all depends on the team. If it was only about goals with strikers, Heskey would never get picked by Capello. Also, I don't think Bent will be this prolific on the international stage. Stats can hide a lot of things.....what's that saying...stats are like miniskirts, they give you a good idea but hide all the important bits. I just think that Cole can be more effective alongside Rooney and the rest, than Bent.